Nick Xenophon - The most important person in the future of Australian Aviation
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Perff
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dark Knight
Should a 1,000/1,500 requirement be legislated where are pilots going to get this experience? (particulalry in Australia?)
Should a 1,000/1,500 requirement be legislated where are pilots going to get this experience? (particulalry in Australia?)
Yes it's funny how people forget what experience can be gained from GA...
How about "Not being allowed to operate as part of a crew in RPT A/c over +5700kgs, again, where will experienced pilots come from?"
DUH they come from GA... Just like they used to... Right now the goverment could pass legislation that to be be a co-pilot on above 5700kg you must have 1500hrs and the industry wouldn't even blink. Except they may have to start improving conditions...But then again an extra couple dollars a ticket isn't hard...
There are heaps of GA pilots just waiting to get into a turbo-prop or regional jobs with well in excess of 1500hrs...
How about "Not being allowed to operate as part of a crew in RPT A/c over +5700kgs, again, where will experienced pilots come from?" DUH they come from GA... Just like they used to... Right now the goverment could pass legislation that to be be a co-pilot on above 5700kg you must have 1500hrs and the industry wouldn't even blink. Except they may have to start improving conditions...But then again an extra couple dollars a ticket isn't hard...
There are heaps of GA pilots just waiting to get into a turbo-prop or regional jobs with well in excess of 1500hrs...
Also i got at least 2000hours in GA. Some instructing, most charter with about 800 hours turbine to boot. I never paid for an endorsement nor did i pay any sort of bond
I learnt alot and it made me a better pilot without a doubt! All within 2 years... Now i work for an major airline and i still haven't paid for an endorsement
So allow young people the oppurtunity to gain the experience and come up through the ranks like the 'ol days and make better pilots for the future. End Cadetships there is no need except financial gain by carriers in Australia...
I learnt alot and it made me a better pilot without a doubt! All within 2 years... Now i work for an major airline and i still haven't paid for an endorsementSo allow young people the oppurtunity to gain the experience and come up through the ranks like the 'ol days and make better pilots for the future. End Cadetships there is no need except financial gain by carriers in Australia...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can train your way to a standard, but you cannot check your way to a standard. However, the perpensity towards checking has become the standard paradigm within Australia.
A box ticking exercise to ensure compliance, just never mind the content.
Its ironic that in a number of "second/third world countries", the concept of training is thoroughly understood..........but then they see the results of accidents more often.
The phrase "race to the bottom" is unfortunately accurate in the Senators speech, as we pass those aviation regimes whom we once considered inferior.
A box ticking exercise to ensure compliance, just never mind the content.
Its ironic that in a number of "second/third world countries", the concept of training is thoroughly understood..........but then they see the results of accidents more often.
The phrase "race to the bottom" is unfortunately accurate in the Senators speech, as we pass those aviation regimes whom we once considered inferior.
I fear that the good senator may only achieve (if anything) an increased checking regimen. Why? Because it's cheap for the beaurocrats to implement and to the idiot public it looks as though serious action is being taken.
IMO the biggest threat to aviation safety isn't 200 hr FO's. The biggest threat to aviation safety is poor quality training and FATIGUE i.e. the two major factors in the Colgan accident. Neither of which have been addressed in the U.S. or here.
Then again no one can vilify fatigue. You can't put a face to it on the 6 o'clock news, nor can you impress people with daring stories about how it let you down on a dark and stormy night (but you used your superior ability to save the day).
No, the problem is not fatigue; the problem is definitely 200 hr pilots. The sooner that we drag these individuals out into the street and publicly execute them, the sooner we, and all the travelling public, will be safe from this menace.
We can then go back to not being bothered by fatigue, who has been with us for a while now and has never hurt anyone.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Australasia
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, do we just give up?
Folks,
Interesting mixture of positive and negative commentary.
What I find interesting is the connections people make in these sorts of discussions between concepts and motivation. Frankly, I don't really care what motivates the various players in this current episode - I don't care if some are management people or union people or non-pilots or well-rounded cynics! I actually don't care what Nick Xenophon's motivation for this exercise is (although I suspect that he is much maligned by some who do not understand his independence), however I am just pleased that an opportunity may present itself for the law makers to review something that everybody (other than us) heretofore has said is a wonderful system working well.
I would love to get paid more. I would love to have better conditions as well. I would love my children to want to follow me into aviation.
I have absolutely no expectation that this proposed Senate Enquiry will achieve any of those things.
However, I would love to have a vibrant industry, well respected for its intellectual and practical value, that attracted future generations as a desirable and rewarding profession and that invoked a culture of honesty, self-awareness and safely efficient provision of transportation. If this opportunity crystallises and the existing system is subjected to deep scrutiny, then I will be happy regardless of the detailed outcomes. If we do not support that scrutiny to the best of our ability, then we deserve everything that we get.
and Bruce's comment about "other blue collar workers" will become self-fulfilling....
Stay Alive
Interesting mixture of positive and negative commentary.
What I find interesting is the connections people make in these sorts of discussions between concepts and motivation. Frankly, I don't really care what motivates the various players in this current episode - I don't care if some are management people or union people or non-pilots or well-rounded cynics! I actually don't care what Nick Xenophon's motivation for this exercise is (although I suspect that he is much maligned by some who do not understand his independence), however I am just pleased that an opportunity may present itself for the law makers to review something that everybody (other than us) heretofore has said is a wonderful system working well.
I would love to get paid more. I would love to have better conditions as well. I would love my children to want to follow me into aviation.
I have absolutely no expectation that this proposed Senate Enquiry will achieve any of those things.
However, I would love to have a vibrant industry, well respected for its intellectual and practical value, that attracted future generations as a desirable and rewarding profession and that invoked a culture of honesty, self-awareness and safely efficient provision of transportation. If this opportunity crystallises and the existing system is subjected to deep scrutiny, then I will be happy regardless of the detailed outcomes. If we do not support that scrutiny to the best of our ability, then we deserve everything that we get.
and Bruce's comment about "other blue collar workers" will become self-fulfilling....
Stay Alive
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hotel, Crew Bus, Flight Deck, Hotel
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impending Pilot Shortage requires Cadet Scheme To Fill Seats
So we can assume that this Looming pilot shortage will result AFTER the 1000s of experienced Aussie airline pilots, forced to work most of their flying careers overseas (in HK, the sand pit, SQ, Asia, Europe), have returned to Aus to fill the vacant positions, (assuming they would like to return to Aus).
Oh, maybe they are not expected to return. Why?
Perhaps because the T&Cs are so poor here now with these budget airlines they cannot justify returning even though they wish to.
As others have pointed out, there wasnt a shortage of pilots in Aus in 2007 and I doubt there will be for a very long time (if ever).
These cadet schemes are purely further 'cost cutting' by airline management beancounters.
Oh, maybe they are not expected to return. Why?
Perhaps because the T&Cs are so poor here now with these budget airlines they cannot justify returning even though they wish to.
As others have pointed out, there wasnt a shortage of pilots in Aus in 2007 and I doubt there will be for a very long time (if ever).
These cadet schemes are purely further 'cost cutting' by airline management beancounters.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is poor quality training and FATIGUE i.e. the two major factors in the Colgan accident. Neither of which have been addressed in the U.S. or here.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Sticks
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
relax737
ben sandilands is brilliant.
relax 737 wrote:
I know little of Ben Sandilands, haven't read much of his writing, but do recall disagreeing strongly with him on something he did write a few years back, so googled him. His website gives this info:
About Ben Sandilands
A reporter since November 30, 1960, Ben looks at what really matters up in the sky: public administration of air transport and its safety, the accountability of the carriers, and space for everyone’s knees.
The highlights are mine.
I'm not out to shoot the messenger, but he doesn't sound like someone with anything like a comprehensive knowledge of aviation other than possibly as a passenger.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure there is GA which I am not discounting at all but there are some indications the level of GA is/has been shringking over a number of years though there is possibibly some increase in the mining service industry.
This problem has been around for years way back into the late fifties at least, ebbing and flowing depending on supply and demand. Reviewing the Boeing and Airbus figures of expected fleet numbers correlated to flight crew numbers there clear evidnece of a looming crew shortage.
Are the flying schools here producing sufficient pilots?
How will the youth of today be shown an career in aviation is a worhwhile career? (particulary when they have to come up with significant money to pay for training, ratings and getting a job not initially paying much more than a clerk)
Managment in the end is not interested in experience, working conditions per se; they just want flight crew to fill the seats and do the job for the lowest possible cost. If 250hour co-pilots can fulfill this requirement (and they can) why hire others perhaps requiring higher crew costs?
They will use all their might and powers to convince the regulator and leglaalors of this. A persuasive argument is the many, many operators who operate safely around the world daily with these crews.
Was the introduction of the multi crew licence a step in this direction?
Most probably and if the arguments of pilots here are correct and is to be supported, pilots were noticeably absent in lobbying to prevent the introduction of this concept.
Technology is available, tried and tested for many years that it is not inconceiveable to suggest the next step could well be the removal of the requirement for Co-pilots?
Certainly a concept management could fully support.
This problem has been around for years way back into the late fifties at least, ebbing and flowing depending on supply and demand. Reviewing the Boeing and Airbus figures of expected fleet numbers correlated to flight crew numbers there clear evidnece of a looming crew shortage.
Are the flying schools here producing sufficient pilots?
How will the youth of today be shown an career in aviation is a worhwhile career? (particulary when they have to come up with significant money to pay for training, ratings and getting a job not initially paying much more than a clerk)
Managment in the end is not interested in experience, working conditions per se; they just want flight crew to fill the seats and do the job for the lowest possible cost. If 250hour co-pilots can fulfill this requirement (and they can) why hire others perhaps requiring higher crew costs?
They will use all their might and powers to convince the regulator and leglaalors of this. A persuasive argument is the many, many operators who operate safely around the world daily with these crews.
Was the introduction of the multi crew licence a step in this direction?
Most probably and if the arguments of pilots here are correct and is to be supported, pilots were noticeably absent in lobbying to prevent the introduction of this concept.
Technology is available, tried and tested for many years that it is not inconceiveable to suggest the next step could well be the removal of the requirement for Co-pilots?
Certainly a concept management could fully support.
Last edited by Dark Knight; 20th Sep 2010 at 04:09. Reason: speellling & addition
Lester, Dark Knight, Relax', you're all missing the point, re: the ATPL requirement at least.
The profession in Australia is in decline. Unless you've been living under a rock, or are overseas perhaps, you would know this. It is this decline that threatens the very cornerstone of aviation saftey in this country. There are 2 reasons for this.
Firstly, the allure of flight doesn't have the same appeal to the same number of people (young and not so young) as it once did. This is a product of our advanced society and probably due in no small measure to the massive increase in the availability of air travel to a much wider section of the community.
Secondly, the standing and respect of the professional pilot has declined. In some small part due to the situation above, but mostly because of the inexorable decline in pilots wages and conditions when compared to the rest of modern society. I say compared to the rest of society, because that's what the Bruce Buchanan's of this world are trying to do. Reduce the standing of Airline Pilot to that of an apprentice, or a common blue-collar worker. I mean no disrespect to blue-collar workers, I come from a long line and was one myself for a long number of years.
There's not much that can be done about the first reason, but it is brilliant in it's simplicity, what can be done about the second.
The line from the movie "Build it and they will come" is, IMHO very appropriate. The participation rate for professional licences has dropped by a factor of 10 over the last 2 decades. Once upon a time the pool of suitable candidates were such that even after the non-hackers were weeded out, more than enough were left to satisfy the airlines needs. Make the profession desirable again, and the participation rate will grow. Not because of some scam designed to prey on the dreams of those who don't know any better, but because of the elevation of the profession of Airline pilot back to a position where it rightfully belongs.
A minimum of an ATPL!
The profession in Australia is in decline. Unless you've been living under a rock, or are overseas perhaps, you would know this. It is this decline that threatens the very cornerstone of aviation saftey in this country. There are 2 reasons for this.
Firstly, the allure of flight doesn't have the same appeal to the same number of people (young and not so young) as it once did. This is a product of our advanced society and probably due in no small measure to the massive increase in the availability of air travel to a much wider section of the community.
Secondly, the standing and respect of the professional pilot has declined. In some small part due to the situation above, but mostly because of the inexorable decline in pilots wages and conditions when compared to the rest of modern society. I say compared to the rest of society, because that's what the Bruce Buchanan's of this world are trying to do. Reduce the standing of Airline Pilot to that of an apprentice, or a common blue-collar worker. I mean no disrespect to blue-collar workers, I come from a long line and was one myself for a long number of years.
There's not much that can be done about the first reason, but it is brilliant in it's simplicity, what can be done about the second.
The line from the movie "Build it and they will come" is, IMHO very appropriate. The participation rate for professional licences has dropped by a factor of 10 over the last 2 decades. Once upon a time the pool of suitable candidates were such that even after the non-hackers were weeded out, more than enough were left to satisfy the airlines needs. Make the profession desirable again, and the participation rate will grow. Not because of some scam designed to prey on the dreams of those who don't know any better, but because of the elevation of the profession of Airline pilot back to a position where it rightfully belongs.
A minimum of an ATPL!
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There may well be pilots in GA with 1000s of hours who do not have an airline gig. This may not be fair (life isn't) but for whatever reason they didn't get the job.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airline CEO's are the safety risk
I wonder whether these new generation aviation hot shot CEO's would accept a first year med graduate performing a basic operation?
CEO's are bean counters and have no idea about safety. Combine that with the company's safety managers who massage the figures and don't paint a true and realistic picture of what is reality or what is really going on to the CEO (because they fear the CEO would punt them for incompetence or bad publicity) and you end up with a recipe for disaster.
Perhaps for the good Senator the penny has dropped and he has now become accutely aware that every time he flies on a major airline in business class while sipping wine and reading The Fin Review his a#s isn't as safe as he thought ?
Mr Hat is 100% correct, Australia is a smoking hole waiting to happen.The 'glass is half full' people will dispute this as being scaremongering,so be it.But I am happy for anybody to frame my comments and then re-visit them in 5 yeras time to see whether us 'glass half empty' spruikers are vindicated.
It is time that CEO's before appointment had a minimum of lets say 10 years within a 'safety focused role' before they can run an airline . Let's see the Senator push that agenda !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So where does the money come from?
In the media and amongst the general public there is excitement/euphoria about about dirt cheap tickets. People that wouldn't dream of even catching a taxi to the airport now fly to various destinations around Australia. Off they go laughing and cheering none the wiser. Everyone is having a great time. Even the good Senator is a strong supporter of this. In fact, word is that since 03' fares have even become even cheaper! Yipeee. So where does the money come from? Is there such thing as a free ride or is there a trade off?
Everyone will recall the saying "you don't get something for nothing". My dad taught me this when I was in primary school. So how does it work?
Well I suppose, aircraft are becoming more technologically advanced and being flown a lot more efficiently than in years gone by. You also have to pay for your meal and drink on board with most airlines these days. Finally the airline working conditions aren't what they used to be. Airline staff used to be the envy of many in the old days when popular opinion saw them as 'set for life'.
So what happens at the end of the day when we have brand new aircraft, flex tracks direct tracking to the 5 mile final everywhere we go? On board we sell a lot of terrible meals for exorbitant prices served to you by contract flight attendants on minimum wage and rest. All is going well.
At the end of the day (3am) we gather around and count the money only to work out that at $49 a seat we really didn't make that much money. Someone yells "we need more aircraft NOW!". Down the road in the meantime, Airline X minus starts up with all facilities made out of recycled cardboard making our beloved Airline E minus $49 airfares look expensive (RIIP OOFF!! and right on cue while I'm writing the post comes a typical gem about AIRLINES ripping the public off Travellers furious over hidden airline fees | News.com.au).
Next day Airline X minus advertises for the same destinations for $4.90! "Hell thats an extra 45 bucks savin', I can get an extra 4 Jim n' Cokes into me for that - I'll go with them hahaha" says one punter to another whilst in the queue waiting for a doubleskinnymaxiCUPPAchino-larte at the aiport cafe. The cycle continues.
So there has to be a point where the yield from the low fares and rising cost of running an airline with a relatively fixed population cancel each other out. I'm no accountant but even I can see that. Indeed the cost of living is going up and up and up everyday. There's even a talk of a carbon tax now. So how come fares keep getting cheaper? Before we get to that magic crossover point the little extra buffers that block up various holes in the swiss cheese model need to come out. "They are costing far too much!" one 'manager' announces assertively in a quivering tone to his non tertiary educated superior. Little things like extra training/retaining/attracting experienced and educated staff. "They've all go to go" "these things they fly themselves you know".
The reality is that the industry is now attracting the bottom of the barrel now all the way from CEO to the pilot. The top managers go and work for companies like BHP or Leighton where every year they improve their product whilst also still amazingly paying dividends to shareholders (GFC and all). The top pilots will probably head off overseas if unable to get a reasonable deal here. So when the 180 seat jet runs off the end of the runway due to "Pilot Error" (as exclusively reported on Today Tonight) I'm going to sit back and say to shocked friends and relatives: "Told you so" "Don't come a cryin' in yer beer to me".. "go take a holiday to the Gold Coast only $5 to get there".
The sad thing about this whole thing is that Joe average has no idea of what is actually going on. They're walking around thinking "how good is this? I"m off to the Goldie for a fiver" or "geez who would have thought little Johhny a big Airline pilot hey flyin them big ones and it only cost him 200 large". They buy the ticket just as the senator says and think its just as safe as its always been. Afterall "these things they fly themselves these days".
There is no such thing as a free ride people.
Everyone will recall the saying "you don't get something for nothing". My dad taught me this when I was in primary school. So how does it work?
Well I suppose, aircraft are becoming more technologically advanced and being flown a lot more efficiently than in years gone by. You also have to pay for your meal and drink on board with most airlines these days. Finally the airline working conditions aren't what they used to be. Airline staff used to be the envy of many in the old days when popular opinion saw them as 'set for life'.
So what happens at the end of the day when we have brand new aircraft, flex tracks direct tracking to the 5 mile final everywhere we go? On board we sell a lot of terrible meals for exorbitant prices served to you by contract flight attendants on minimum wage and rest. All is going well.
At the end of the day (3am) we gather around and count the money only to work out that at $49 a seat we really didn't make that much money. Someone yells "we need more aircraft NOW!". Down the road in the meantime, Airline X minus starts up with all facilities made out of recycled cardboard making our beloved Airline E minus $49 airfares look expensive (RIIP OOFF!! and right on cue while I'm writing the post comes a typical gem about AIRLINES ripping the public off Travellers furious over hidden airline fees | News.com.au).
Next day Airline X minus advertises for the same destinations for $4.90! "Hell thats an extra 45 bucks savin', I can get an extra 4 Jim n' Cokes into me for that - I'll go with them hahaha" says one punter to another whilst in the queue waiting for a doubleskinnymaxiCUPPAchino-larte at the aiport cafe. The cycle continues.
So there has to be a point where the yield from the low fares and rising cost of running an airline with a relatively fixed population cancel each other out. I'm no accountant but even I can see that. Indeed the cost of living is going up and up and up everyday. There's even a talk of a carbon tax now. So how come fares keep getting cheaper? Before we get to that magic crossover point the little extra buffers that block up various holes in the swiss cheese model need to come out. "They are costing far too much!" one 'manager' announces assertively in a quivering tone to his non tertiary educated superior. Little things like extra training/retaining/attracting experienced and educated staff. "They've all go to go" "these things they fly themselves you know".
The reality is that the industry is now attracting the bottom of the barrel now all the way from CEO to the pilot. The top managers go and work for companies like BHP or Leighton where every year they improve their product whilst also still amazingly paying dividends to shareholders (GFC and all). The top pilots will probably head off overseas if unable to get a reasonable deal here. So when the 180 seat jet runs off the end of the runway due to "Pilot Error" (as exclusively reported on Today Tonight) I'm going to sit back and say to shocked friends and relatives: "Told you so" "Don't come a cryin' in yer beer to me".. "go take a holiday to the Gold Coast only $5 to get there".
The sad thing about this whole thing is that Joe average has no idea of what is actually going on. They're walking around thinking "how good is this? I"m off to the Goldie for a fiver" or "geez who would have thought little Johhny a big Airline pilot hey flyin them big ones and it only cost him 200 large". They buy the ticket just as the senator says and think its just as safe as its always been. Afterall "these things they fly themselves these days".
There is no such thing as a free ride people.
Last edited by Mr. Hat; 21st Sep 2010 at 03:44.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Hat & Jim,
Chairman Greenspan: A Fiat Mind for a Fiat Age
Although is appears way off topic at first blush, it is EXACTLY the same process that has occurred in aviation since the deregulation in the 70's.
This is the motive force for the changes we are seeing in aviation. It will end in tears.
In 2001, David Tice testified before the House Financial Services Committee, "The most reckless fund managers, the most reckless auditors, the most reckless investment bankers, the most reckless corporate officers made the most money. So you had greater and greater incentives to promote the most reckless guys." Meanwhile "the most reckless CEOs hired the most reckless chief financial officers."
Although is appears way off topic at first blush, it is EXACTLY the same process that has occurred in aviation since the deregulation in the 70's.
This is the motive force for the changes we are seeing in aviation. It will end in tears.
You don't become eligible for an upgrade without passing checks to an acceptable standard. You don't pass the upgrade without meeting the required standards. You don't retain your command without continued acceptable checks.
Datal Seniority does not allow poorly trained pilots to move into the left seat, only low standards can do that.
Datal Seniority does not allow poorly trained pilots to move into the left seat, only low standards can do that.
Last edited by Kelly Slater; 21st Sep 2010 at 04:03.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been against the concept of Datal Seniority since 1988.
I have flown with captains who have been totally out of their depth when dealing with wx, pax, all sorts of operational stuff. After returning to Australia after some years overseas, I was agast at the low standard of some captains that I flew with. I often had to hold the hand of the incompetant.
I could hardly believe, after I got my own command (B737) at the attitude of some FOs who felt that Datal Seniority confered upon them some automatic "right of passage" to the Left Hand Seat, when it was quite clearly beyond them.
Datal Seniority not only lowers the standard of our industry (here we are unique) but also serves to erode our Terms & Condidtions.
The sooner our industry ditches this outmoded concept, the better off we all will be.
I have flown with captains who have been totally out of their depth when dealing with wx, pax, all sorts of operational stuff. After returning to Australia after some years overseas, I was agast at the low standard of some captains that I flew with. I often had to hold the hand of the incompetant.
I could hardly believe, after I got my own command (B737) at the attitude of some FOs who felt that Datal Seniority confered upon them some automatic "right of passage" to the Left Hand Seat, when it was quite clearly beyond them.
Datal Seniority not only lowers the standard of our industry (here we are unique) but also serves to erode our Terms & Condidtions.
The sooner our industry ditches this outmoded concept, the better off we all will be.